The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-08-01
A POLITICAL VERDICT.
conspirator

| The disagreement of the jury in the con-
spiracy case in the United States Court, and
the manner and line upon which the disagree
| ment was made, are well calculated to shock
| the community. It is an amazing, a startling
statement that upon the trial for crime, and
that felony, jury should divide upon party
lines, and that because defendants are Demo
Gratis they should not be punished if guilty.
| It is amazing that Democratic newspapers,
| Democratic leaders, and Democratic lawyers
| should denounce the prosecution of parties
charged with crime, simply and solely because
they are Democrats and because the crime was
committed in the interest of the Democratic
| party; yet such is the fact in the case. That
the crime was committed everybody admits;
! it is bold, patent fact, so apparent that the
| defendants themselves do not deny that it
| committed by somebody. That it was in
the interest of Democratic candidates is just
as apparent, and that fact makes it clear be-
| yond question that it was done by some one
having the success of these candidates at
heart, and that establishes the motive of at
defendants it will be conceded had the OPP
portunity to commit the offense, and it is just
as clear that no one but Democrat had the
motive and opportunity to commit the crime.
Thus given the opportunity, the motive, and
the fact, and to this added the testimony of
Perkins and others, would seem to establish
the guilt of some of the defendants, not only
beyond reasonable doubt, but beyond the
possibility of doubt Yet Democratic jurors
were asked to acquit Democratic defendants
because they are Democrats, and only because
they are Democrats. There is no politics in
crime yet jurors are asked to acquit defend
ants because of their political faith. Some of
the witnesses in this case, brought in to
establish character, swore that defendant
not moral man, but that he
good Democrat, and true to his party and his
friends. Would Presbyterian, Methodist
or Campbellite juror be asked to acquit de-
PENDANT because he belonged to the same
church, Would even a Masonic juror be
asked to acquit defendant because he was
Mason7 Certainly not. IF guilty, the defend
ant was not good church member or good
Mason, and those churches or that order
would speedily expel him. But not so with
Democratic jurors the fact that defendant
is Democrat is pleaded in bar. The maxim
that the king can do no wrong is changed in
Indiana to read that Democrat can do no
wrong. The Democratic party is a city of
refuge in which the Ku-klux Khan and shot
gun brigands of the South, and the user of
the erasing- knife, the acid bottle and the
tally-sheet forger in the North may seek i'm
munity from punishment. The Democratic
ticket is talisman that protects the holder
from all harm. The consprator may work
out his nefarious purpose provided it is in the
interest of the Democratic party, and Dem
ocratic newspapers, Democratic Office holders,
Democratic leaders and Democratic character
provers ask the acquittal of men charged with
crime, not because they may not be guilty,
but because they Democrats. They may
be men of VIGOROUSLY bad character, harbor-
ers and associates of the very worst classes,
but if they be good Democrats they are to go
acquit. That one or two of the defendants
have not been proven guilty, and may not in
fact, be guilty, is probable; but that some
Democrats are guilty is just as clear as that
the sun shines Yet the Democratic party
demands the acquittal of all because the crime
was committed in its interest.
Not all Democrats so act. There are Dem
ocrats on the committee of one hundred, and
there are Democrats who denounce their
methods, but when they do they are apt to
come in for share Of the abuse that the
Democratic newspapers and organs heap upon
those who seek the enforcement of all laws,
no matter whether the violators Demo
Gratis or Republicans. These honest Demo
Gratis must not interfere with the machine or
they will be read out of the party. Whenev-
er Democratic gang, North or South, is &C
cused of an offense against the ballot, their
organs at once set up howl, and without in
quiry as to the facts, espouse the cause of the |
accused. Such is modern Democracy.
FROM the beginning of the investigation of |
the tally-sheet forgeries the Sentinel has |
treated the whole matter from a partisan |
stand point, screening the perpetrators of the |
fraud as far al possible, denouncing members |
of the committee of one hundred by name,
and in every way trying to discredit the in |
yeSti cation In this it doubtless ranresented |